Profile of Action Learning's Principal Pioneer–Reginald W. Revans

This article attempts to provide a short profile of Professor R. W. Revans—the founding father of action learning. It traces a life which quickly indicated intellectual and athletic gifts—with determination and deep humanitarianism. In the 1930s, Revans cleaned the blackboard for Einstein and was the last doctoral student of J.J. Thomson (father of the electron) at the Cavendish Laboratories (Cambridge), where Baron Ernest Rutherford headed the laboratory and worked to split the atom. Revans' work before, during, and after the war is referred to, mentioning his days at the Coal Board, Manchester University, the HIC (Hospital Internal Communication) project, Belgium, and finally mentioning some current action learning developments.     

The Nurses Memorandum of 1938: a first step in the development of action learning?

This article concerns the origins of the idea of action learning, especially the claim by Revans that his Memorandum on ‘The Entry of Girls into the Nursing Profession’ in Essex hospitals written in 1938 was the first step in the development of action learning. Whilst Revans repeatedly made this claim, there is no evidence in the actual words of the Memorandum to support it, and he never explained the basis for his belief. Why Revans saw this paper as a first step is therefore a mystery. In this paper we examine the circumstances of the production of the Memorandum to find possible answers. After discussing the evidence we conclude that Revans’ claim is based on the ideas and insights which occurred to him in 1938 in his research and thinking, rather than upon what he actually wrote. We also suggest some defining aspects of action learning can be traced back to ideas first stimulated in the research and production of the 1938 Memorandum, including the importance of first-hand knowledge in tackling organisational problems; the limitations of expert knowledge in complex conditions; the impact of hierarchy on the flow of knowledge; the importance of problem ownership in bring about action for improvement and the primacy of learning in the processes of problem-solving and innovation.     

On the nature of problems in action learning

The article aims to explore the nature of problems in action learning. Beginning with Revans' distinction between problems and puzzles, it draws parallels with the notion of wicked and tame problems. It offers four means of considering problems in action learning – in terms of the locus of a set's work; from the viewpoint of an organisation using action learning; in terms of the different ways in which learning is used and as distinguishing between technical and practical knowledge. It addresses the question of whether action learning is suited for wicked problems only. The challenge to action learning provided by appreciative inquiry is examined and a range of conclusions is offered.     

The innovation paradox: a selective review of the literature on action learning and innovation

This paper explores selective literatures in the two fields of action learning and innovation, and seeks insights into the processes of, and connections between, innovation, engagement and implementation. We searched the action learning articles for references to innovation, beginning with the work of Revans, who highlights the innovation paradox, which becomes a key theme of this paper. We searched the very large innovation literature for references to innovation as a learning process and as a factor in organisational learning. The paper surveys the factors said to enable innovation, and briefly outlines some inhibitors, before considering Revans’ contribution to thinking about innovation. This is followed by a consideration of developments in action learning and innovation since Revans. The findings suggest that paradox theory is a useful way of thinking about innovation, conceived of as a practical problem involving resistances and frequent failures of implementation and adoption, and also propose action learning as a means of working with and addressing paradox. A limitation of this study is its lack of empirical data. Further research could usefully interrogate examples of innovation practices and ask such questions as to why innovation remains so elusive, and how innovative capacities and capabilities can be developed and enhanced.     

Action learning dissertations: structure,supervision and examination

In qualification programmes based on action learning, there has hitherto been little articulation of what is particular to research dissertations undertaken in an action learning mode. This article addresses the questions of what such a dissertation entails and how it can be undertaken, supervised and examined. It discusses some of the foundations of action learning research and how accounts of practice may be integrated with reflection. It suggests that an action learning dissertation may be framed around Revans' Systems Alpha, Beta and Gamma as interlocking systems that address the investigation of the problem on which the dissertation is based, its resolution and the learning of the participant. A blueprint is presented that incorporates four elements: (i) the work and organisation and the participant's engagement with it, (ii) the action learning set and what the participant learned through it, (iii) the information and literature which have made a difference to the participant's thinking and (iv) the personal and professional learning of the participant.     

What action learning is not in the twenty-first century

This article is about what action learning is in the twenty-first century. In 1983 Reg Revans explained how action learning differed from seven phenomena with which it had been confused. This article explores how action learning differs from seven further phenomena with which it is currently confused. The article details similarities and differences between action learning and self-directed teams, coaching, focus groups, action research, seminars, problem-based learning and experiential learning.     

The impact of action learning: what difference are we making in the world?

Involvement in a number of action-learning programmes and associated development opportunities has led the Professional Development Centre Limited to question the relevance of a strict adherence to the ‘rules’ of action learning as described by Reg Revans. A deliberate focus of one such programme to a financial services organisation offered some insights into the challenges of introducing action learning into the field. Pressures on organisations of time and business expedients might make them believe that action learning is too slow a technique to offer real rewards. However, elements of the action-learning story do resonate in the workplace, key concepts that appear to ‘stick’ are listening, questioning and equality. The utilisation of these skills enhances leadership and organisational development and can still provide a useful set of actions to aim for. This is especially true in problem solving and the way in which respect and equality can re-create a different environment or development space.     

Action Learning and the Program at the Revans Centre

Over the past fifty years or so, there have been numerous attempts to give a clear definition of action learning and explanations of how to design and operate action learning programs. Also, there have been a number of academics who have tried desperately to engage action learning and link it to academic degrees. This paper attempts to explain the emergence of the Revans Centre for Action Learning and Research based at the University of Salford in England and highlight its distinctive features compared with other organizations and/or institutes. A series of examples are given which demonstrate the philosophy of application of the work of the Revans Centre and how it views professional practitioners and academics interfacing and learning from one another. Specific programs are identified and described which show how individuals registered in these programs participate in and use action learning to learn and to accomplish particular program requirements. Finally, the paper puts forward some of the intellectual developments which have progressed since the Centre was officially opened in December 1995.     

Action learning: nothing so practical as a good theory

Kurt Lewin's epigrammatic paradox is particularly true for action learning. Marquardt and Waddill (2004), and previously Yorks O'Neil and Marsick (1999) have approached the issue of the relationship between theory and action learning by looking at a variety of theories which they have placed in ‘schools’. This provides an interesting analysis, but may be less well fitted to demonstrate the ‘practical’ element in Lewin's statement. While it is interesting for many of us to know that our ideas or our actions can be interpreted and, even better understood, in relation to a school, it is my experience that for many people action is more related to the ideas of a particular individual rather than to a diffuse categorisation such as a school. From this perspective, it is even more bizarre than it first seemed that Reg Revans, otherwise acknowledged by Marquardt and Waddill as their main source about action learning, does not appear in any of the five schools they have created. Moreover, the twenty six names they include in their schools embrace a number of theorists who are really peripheral in terms of the specifics of action learning, whatever their merits as general theorists about learning in total. In this article I look at the potential for understanding about, and implementation of, action learning through the work of the five theorists who I believe to be most significant. Significant because of the content of their theories, and because they are theorists most likely to be known to, and at least partially understood, by facilitators of action learning.     

Developing an action learning way of working within a leadership context in higher education: barriers and enablers

This account of practice considers action learning within an accredited leadership course at a post-1992 university. It outlines a more individualistic approach than that envisioned by Reg Revans and questions how this technique, inherited from a Staff Development colleague, could potentially be improved.     

Bourdieu’s habitus and field: implications on the practice and theory of critical action learning

This paper considers the logic of practice of the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu in relation to critical action learning: in particular habitus which is co-created with field and the interplay amongst the two in the form of misrecognition and risk. We draw on interviews with participants who have experienced action learning as part of an NHS leadership programme. We argue that Bourdieu provides helpful ways of understanding and explaining the complex processes of social interactions which are centre stage in action learning – especially the ‘social friction’ through which action learners gain new insights and new prompts to action in their workplace from learning set members. These insights can support action learning practitioners keen to explore their own practice.     

Writing it down—writing it out—writing it up: researching our practice through action learning

We dedicate this article to the late Professor John Morris, an appreciative inquirer into and true enabler of the writing of practice for each of us.

What value is added for writer and reader by intentionally keeping personal learning part of public researching? When a practitioner attends conscientiously to ‘the relationship with their research,’ does it make a difference to their learning and researching? If it does, can this difference also make a difference to the reader …? This paper addresses these kinds of queries from the standpoint of ‘scholarly practice,’ the research undertaken by mature managers and professionals who account in text for initiating and sustaining change within their complex contexts of work. Through exploring a variety of learning frames, the authors identify the distinctive opportunities and challenges in practice-led enquiry, and raise implications critically for the researching professional as well as for their ‘enablers’—the academic supervisors or fellow action-learning set members—who support and challenge the efforts of scholarly practitioners to make sense of and explicate their action. Revans's praxeology of action-based learning (systems alpha, beta and gamma) is extended as a research analogue for practice-led knowing. Ontological, methodological and epistemological perspectives are progressively deployed to examine critically the essentially reflexive nature of scholarly practice. The authors depict challenges in scholarly practice of establishing focus, incorporating others' thinking alongside one's own and asserting one's own voice. The paper concludes by warning of two ways in which enablers can unwittingly hijack the purpose of practice-led research.     

Differences and impacts through action learning

Here, we argue that action learning (AL) has been evolving into different variations, whose respective advocates appear to concentrate on one of the several components inherent in Revans’ formulation of AL as L?=?P?+?Q. They do this – sometimes inappropriately – to the virtual or relative exclusion of other aspects, and this has consequences for the outcomes and impact of the AL process. In an attempt to delimit the boundaries between various versions and indeed to identify what Johnson [2010. A framework for the ethical practice of action learning. Action Learning: Research and Practice 7, no. 3: 267–283] called ‘inauthentic’ AL, we have been developing our ideas for a scanning device or framework. We refer briefly to some of the theoretical underpinnings of this framework. We then introduce a fresh taxonomy to explain and illustrate features of five principal variations of emphasis in AL that we have identified. The aim of this framework is to help stakeholders to work towards selecting and co-creating the most appropriate variation of ‘authentic’ AL to suit their unique set of circumstances at any given time. We outline the likely outcomes of each respective variation if taken to extremes and conjecture about their implications. This taxonomy should also help one to reduce the mystique and confusion that often surround AL while acknowledging its complexity. We suggest that by taking advantage of insights provided by this framework, purchasers and potential AL set members in particular are more likely to participate in learning conversations that lead to more informed decisions and actions to address or adjust their respective interests and needs. In conclusion, we identify some areas for further research and development.     

Writing as a Tool in Teaching Sketching: Implications for Architectural Design Education

This article discusses the process of a study designed to develop university students' sketching skills in schools of architecture. Acknowledging the relationship between cognition and writing, it aims to investigate the role of writing in learning sketching among architecture students and to examine how students regulate their thoughts by writing as they work on their free hand sketches. It includes writing texts before and after sketching tasks to improve sketching. The study was implemented in a school of architecture at a Turkish university as part of an elective course on sketching. The students' works were evaluated in terms of their sketches, texts and self‐reports of their thinking and the views and comments of the tutor who carried out the programme. This article discusses how the study was conceived and developed. The results of this study may provide insights for educators in developing strategies in teaching and learning of sketching and design, using multi modes of thinking.     

Monitoring the pathways and outcomes of people from disadvantaged backgrounds and graduate groups

The development of a strong and vibrant knowledge economy is linked directly to successful learning outcomes among university graduates. Building evidence‐based insights on graduate outcomes plays a particularly important role in shaping planning and practice. To this end, this paper analyses some key findings from the Graduate Pathways Survey, the first national study in Australia of bachelor degree graduates' outcomes five years after course completion. It focuses on the outcomes of graduates from disadvantaged groups, people of particular significance in an expanding and increasingly important higher education system. After advancing the rational for this analysis, the paper sketches the overall research approach. The paper continues with an analysis of education and employment outcomes for the target groups, and concludes by summarising implications for building further research insights.     

Revans reversed: focusing on the positive for a change

The classical principles of action learning, based on the work of Revans, usually include working with problems as the core. This article aims, by contrast, to show how a recent project of change has incorporated principles of appreciative inquiry (AI) based on social constructionism and positive psychology into an action learning process involving a wide range of participants. The concern for problems is considered showing that the process of diagnosing a problem can reinforce a deficit orientation. The key ideas of AI are presented, highlighting the purpose of finding out what is going on in terms of what is working well, and in doing so, it becomes possible to build a picture of the strengths and virtues of what is happening at work. Based on findings from a recent project of culture shift in a design and production company, a process of positive action learning is considered.     

All in a knot of one another's labours: self-determination,network organising and learning

This essay is about how to learn to organise to tackle the intractable and most difficult problems of organisations and societies. It opens with a discussion of the nature of such problems, which are the spur for Revans' action learning and the focus of some recent thinking on leadership. Action learning works on the basis of peer relationships and self-determination lends itself naturally to attempts to organise in networks rather than in hierarchies. Taking cancer care as an example of an intractable problem, the centre point of the essay is a case study of an NHS Cancer Network which shows the complex dependencies and connections of this way of working. Although the recent history of organising has been summed up as a trajectory ‘from hierarchies to networks’, I argue that our capabilities with the intractable and wicked problems are limited by our dependence upon hierarchical models of organising and also by management practices that are best suited to ‘tame’ problems and a management education tradition that produces ‘subalterns’ rather than self-determining actors. These points are made via an excursion through three philosophies of freedom: post-colonialism, anarchism and Quakerism. These ideas reveal the cultural legacies to be overcome in the quest to learn how to organise with free actors. The triple practices of action learning, distributed leadership and network organising are offered as being part of the solution.     

Connected learning in the library as a product of hacking,making, social diversity and messiness

Learning is most effective when intrinsically motivated through personal interest, and situated in a supportive socio-cultural context. This paper reports on findings from a study that explored implications for design of interactive learning environments through 18 months of ethnographic observations of people's interactions at “Hack The Evening” (HTE). HTE is a meetup group initiated at the State Library of Queensland in Brisbane, Australia, and dedicated to provide visitors with opportunities for connected learning in relation to hacking, making and do-it-yourself technology. The results provide insights into factors that contributed to HTE as a social, interactive and participatory environment for learning – knowledge is created and co-created through uncoordinated interactions among participants that come from a diversity of backgrounds, skills and areas of expertise. The insights also reveal challenges and barriers that the HTE group faced in regards to connected learning. Four dimensions of design opportunities are presented to overcome those challenges and barriers towards improving connected learning in library buildings and other free-choice-learning environments that seek to embody a more interactive and participatory culture among their users. The insights are relevant for librarians as well as designers, managers and decision-makers of other interactive and free-choice-learning environments.     

Fostering collaborative teacher learning: A typology of school leadership

Previous research indicates that supportive school leadership is a key condition of collaborative teacher learning. The purpose of this study was to develop a typology of how school leaders foster collaborative teacher learning. We adopted an integrative perspective on leadership by examining both learning-centred leadership and distributed leadership practices that are supportive of collaborative teacher learning. Data were gathered by means of interviews with ten school leaders and a questionnaire that was completed by 39 teachers from six secondary schools in the Netherlands. The aim of the interviews was to identify to what extent school leaders applied learning-centred leadership and distributed leadership practices. The questionnaire measured teachers' perceptions of the role of school leaders in teacher learning. As an outcome of this study, we constructed a typology that provides insights into how school leaders foster collaborative teacher learning. Four types of school leaders were distinguished: (a) integrators of teacher learning, (b) facilitators of teacher learning, (c) managers of teacher learning, and (d) managers of daily school practice. Our findings suggest that integration of learning-centred leadership and distributed leadership practices can help school leaders to support collaborative teacher learning.